- 62 -
charge of the offices there; (iii) that Chemical Traders and
Polymer were legitimate businesses that bought and sold products
under their own names; (iv) that secrecy was not the reason he
wrote checks to cash, and cashier's checks to withdraw funds from
the Polymer and Chemical Traders accounts; (v) that Levenson
suggested the Polymer scheme; and (vi) that he never stopped at
Levenson's house to have Levenson sign blank checks. Petitioner
testified that petitioner Ruth Levitt was an original subscriber
of Welev stock. However, the corporate minutes show that she was
not. Finally, petitioner testified that he had nothing to do
with preparing Ruth Levitt's income tax return for 1986.
However, Ruth Levitt testified that he always handled their tax
returns and that she never participated in preparing income tax
returns.
4. Petitioners' Contentions
Petitioners contend that petitioner's concealment in 1986 of
the Welev transaction is not relevant to proving that petitioner
committed fraud for the tax years in issue because it occurred
after the years in issue. We do not consider petitioner's acts
of concealment in 1986 in deciding the fraud issue. However, we
consider the fact that petitioner used Resyn to pay for Welev
during the years in issue but did not report the amounts that
Resyn paid.
Petitioners contend that the fact that Philbin never saw
petitioner involved in Resyn's bookkeeping or instructing anyone
Page: Previous 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011